Hi Rob, > From: Robert Lougher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 14:58:45 +0100
> > > One thing to > > > note is that a threaded interpreter would see something like a 2-4x > > > expansion over "normal" bytecodes when it converts from bytecodes to its > > > internal form (arrays of function pointers). > > > > Direct threading interpreters like JDK's one work on plain Java > > bytecode and they do not need to expand normal bytecode instructions. > > Such expansion may have been required if Java bytecode is not linear > > and rather a tree or other complicated form. > > According to my understanding, an indirect threaded interpreter uses > the original bytecode stream. It's indirect because the handler > address must be looked up via the bytecode. Ah, thanks for the indication. My wording 'direct threading' was not correct. Threading (interpreting) techniques I referred as implemented in JDKs should be called 'token threading', neither direct nor indirect threading because they work directly on bytecode instructions withought any expansion. Note that the interpreter provides NEXT routines to for all native code fragments corresponding to VM instructions. For JVM, this wording like something threading is not very informative because direct interpretation of portable bytecode is naturally 'token threading'. Dave's last posting was based on direct threading technique and his saying was correct about direct threading but my posting was incorrect in advance. Kazuyuki Shudo [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.shudo.net/
